- This topic has 43 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by
SK in CV.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 15, 2012 at 9:36 AM #19511February 15, 2012 at 10:06 AM #738062
sdduuuude
ParticipantWelcome to the Ron Paul blog.
All Ron Paul. All day long.
February 15, 2012 at 10:17 AM #738063markmax33
Guest[quote=sdduuuude]Welcome to the Ron Paul blog.
All Ron Paul. All day long.[/quote]
You don’t think proven voter fraud affects our economy and housing market? I’m curious why that wouldn’t be the most important thing?
February 15, 2012 at 10:22 AM #738064enron_by_the_sea
ParticipantI understand that when election is stolen away from you, it feels bad.
– Al Gore & people whose votes were not counted in 2000.
February 15, 2012 at 10:27 AM #738065ParticipantLet’s see RP thinking.
Not counting votes in certain counties in Maine = Fraud
Santorum delegate voting secretly for Paul = Not Fraud!
February 15, 2012 at 11:56 AM #738072ucodegen
Participant[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Let’s see RP thinking.
Not counting votes in certain counties in Maine = Fraud
Santorum delegate voting secretly for Paul = Not Fraud![/quote]
Not accurate. The Republican party decided to use the Caucus structure on some of the states. Why they decided to do that.. beats me unless you feel that the Republican party wants to guarantee that the Repub party leaders want their choice to go to the election and not who the Repub constituents may want.Ron Paul is just gaming their own system.. the system they set up. Not counting districts even though the system they set up says they should.. is fraud. It is a ‘last minute – under the table change to effect the vote. Personally, I believe that the delegates should be bound by the primary.. but that is not how it was set up in some states.
[quote eron_by_the_sea]I understand that when election is stolen away from you, it feels bad.
– Al Gore & people whose votes were not counted in 2000.
[/quote]If you check the record on the Al Gore vote, you will find that Al Gore wanted recounts on only specific districts of Florida where he felt that he would gain, but not in other districts where he felt that he might lose. It went before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court stated that you recount/handcount ALL of Florida or NONE of Florida. You don’t get to cherry pick.As for the ‘popular vote’, there have been other elections where the popular vote went against who ended up being elected due to differing ratios for voters represented by delegates in each state (and the all-nothing rules in some states). Back in the 1800’s, delegates made sense because it was hard to count votes and make sure the count is accurate over such a large area as the United States. Now, it no longer make much sense.
February 15, 2012 at 1:40 PM #738083SK in CV
ParticipantI don’t know if this could really qualify as voter fraud, since no election actually took place. It was a non-binding straw poll. There was apparently a completely separate vote to elect delegates who are also not bound to any particular candidate.
I don’t know if there was any tampering. (No, I didn’t watch the video. I have read a few articles about it. I know reading might be a little harder for you, but it goes a lot faster for me, so I don’t do political videos.) I do know that the whole “cancel the meeting cuz there might be a storm coming” is dubious. We’re talking about Maine. In the winter. There is ALWAYS a storm coming. Though they have had a pretty mild winter. No snow on the ground in central-coastal Maine right now, which is unheard of the middle of Feb. The harbors aren’t frozen over. They’re more likely to cancel an indoor meeting because there ISN’T a storm, so they can go snipe hunting or shoot at visitors.
To answer your last question, yes, votes still count. Since this wasn’t really a vote which meant anything, no harm, no foul. Move on to AZ and MI.
February 15, 2012 at 2:21 PM #738093Guest[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Let’s see RP thinking.
Not counting votes in certain counties in Maine = Fraud
Santorum delegate voting secretly for Paul = Not Fraud![/quote]
Not true – Santorum’s people don’t stick around to be elected as delegates and the rules are clearly written that they need to do that. The only conclusion is the Santorum voters don’t really care that much.
February 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM #738094Guest[quote=SK in CV]I don’t know if this could really qualify as voter fraud, since no election actually took place. It was a non-binding straw poll. There was apparently a completely separate vote to elect delegates who are also not bound to any particular candidate.
I don’t know if there was any tampering. (No, I didn’t watch the video. I have read a few articles about it. I know reading might be a little harder for you, but it goes a lot faster for me, so I don’t do political videos.) I do know that the whole “cancel the meeting cuz there might be a storm coming” is dubious. We’re talking about Maine. In the winter. There is ALWAYS a storm coming. Though they have had a pretty mild winter. No snow on the ground in central-coastal Maine right now, which is unheard of the middle of Feb. The harbors aren’t frozen over. They’re more likely to cancel an indoor meeting because there ISN’T a storm, so they can go snipe hunting or shoot at visitors.
To answer your last question, yes, votes still count. Since this wasn’t really a vote which meant anything, no harm, no foul. Move on to AZ and MI.[/quote]
The vote counts because the media keys on it. They have people claiming he is unelectable and has a ceiling on every 30 minutes.
February 15, 2012 at 2:59 PM #738098Participant[quote=markmax33][quote=sdduuuude]Welcome to the Ron Paul blog.
All Ron Paul. All day long.[/quote]
You don’t think proven voter fraud affects our economy and housing market? I’m curious why that wouldn’t be the most important thing?[/quote]
I don’t think this post adds to anyone’s insight into the housing market or the economy.
It’s a self-serving political post. Nothing more.
February 15, 2012 at 3:03 PM #738099briansd1
Guestmarkmax33’s posts are a nice distraction from the lull in housing news.
Housing moves at a glacial pace, so it’s nice to have entertainment while we observe the real estate market.
February 15, 2012 at 11:22 PM #738151Anonymous
GuestRon Paul is the man
February 16, 2012 at 12:01 AM #738153
svelteParticipantTheorem: Santorum or Gingrich, and probably both, have to drop out for RP to have a snowball’s chance in hell at getting the Rep nom.
Proof:
Total Republican Delegates: 2286
Total Unbound Delegates: 500
Total Bound Delegates: 1786
Total needed to win: 1144
In order to reach 1144 delegates, he would need 36% of the bound delegates and *every single one* of the unbound delegates!
Every single one! And 36% of the rest!
Good luck with that.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2012February 16, 2012 at 7:27 AM #738155Guest[quote=svelte]Theorem: Santorum or Gingrich, and probably both, have to drop out for RP to have a snowball’s chance in hell at getting the Rep nom.
Proof:
Total Republican Delegates: 2286
Total Unbound Delegates: 500
Total Bound Delegates: 1786
Total needed to win: 1144
In order to reach 1144 delegates, he would need 36% of the bound delegates and *every single one* of the unbound delegates!
Every single one! And 36% of the rest!
Good luck with that.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2012%5B/quote%5DSvelte,
Actually in order for Ron Paul to win we need the exact opposite. We need Santorum and Gingrich to stick around as long as possible. If nobody gets 1144 votes and is declared the outright winner it becomes a brokered convention. There are many Paul supporters in those “bound” delegates. As Gingrich and Santorum probably drop out, those delegates will not be bound and can come on over to Paul freely. I think there is actually a very easy mathematical way for Paul to win the nomination without even winning a single state. I do suspect he will win a few of them though, and we’ll be rooting for Gingrich and Santorum to hold up as long as possible. I suspect the GOP will pressure Gingrich and Santorum to drop out if Romney is ahead near the convention so the vote isn’t so split, but that’s where they will probably be trapped as the Paul delegates, and there are many, flood back over to him.February 16, 2012 at 7:37 AM #738171svelteParticipant[quote=markmax33] As Gingrich and Santorum probably drop out, those delegates will not be bound and can come on over to Paul freely. [/quote]
Isn’t that exactly what I said?
[quote=svelte] Theorem: Santorum or Gingrich, and probably both, have to drop out for RP to have a snowball’s chance in hell at getting the Rep nom. [/quote]
It is amazing how you can make agreement with my statement sound like a correction.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.